Consumer acceptance of genetically modified foods in New Zealand

The introduction of genetically modified foods (GMF) in consumer markets worldwide is currently a hot topic for debate. Media hype and the strong position against GMF by activist groups have contributed to the negative image of GMF, often labelled as “Frankenstein” foods. Given this negative image, the purpose of this study is to find out if consumers display more positive perceptions about GMF if positive trade‐offs are made more salient in the purchase decision process. This study examined the impact of additional product benefits on consumer attitudes towards GMF. A sample of 120 consumers was randomly assigned to a (2*2) factorial design manipulating two levels of genetic modification and two levels of additional product benefits. Results indicate that genetic modification in food products has a negative impact on attitudes. More importantly, the presence of additional product benefits resulting from GMF was not enough to offset this negative view. Reasons for such results are discussed, conclusions for the industry and regulatory bodies drawn and implications for future research given.

[1]  D. Macer.  Attitudes to genetic engineering : Japanese and international comparisons , 1992 .

[2]  J. Kelley.  Public Perceptions of Genetic Engineering: Australia, 1994 , 1995 .

[3]  R. Deshpandé,et al.  Situational Ethnicity and Consumer Behavior , 1989 .

[4]  Klaus G. Grunert,et al.  Consumer perceptions of food products involving genetic modification : results from a qualitative study in four Nordic countries , 2001 .

[5]  D Hedderley,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model and Communication About Food Risks , 1997, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  Christopher Ritson,et al.  Consumer acceptability of genetically modified foods with special reference to farmed salmon , 1996 .

[7]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[8]  R. Shepherd,et al.  The influence of realistic product exposure on attitudes towards genetic engineering of food , 1996 .

[9]  Klaus G. Grunert,et al.  Three issues in consumer quality perception and acceptance of dairy products , 2000 .

[10]  B. Wansink,et al.  The Marketing Battle Over Genetically Modified Foods , 2001 .

[11]  R Shepherd,et al.  Social determinants of food choice , 1999, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society.

[12]  Anna Saba,et al.  Consumer attitudes toward the use of gene technology in tomato production , 2002 .

[13]  Lynn J. Frewer,et al.  Reactions to information about genetic engineering: impact of source characteristics, perceived personal relevance, and persuasiveness , 1999 .

[14]  J. Zaichkowsky.  Measuring the Involvement Construct , 1985 .

[15]  Susan Miles,et al.  Investigating specific concerns about different food hazards , 2001 .

[16]  Lynn J. Frewer,et al.  Genetic engineering and food: What determines consumer acceptance , 1995 .

[17]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  A Causal Model Explaining the Perception and Acceptance of Gene Technology1 , 1999 .

[18]  Saroja Subrahmanyan,et al.  Perceptions and Attitudes of Singaporeans towards Genetically Modified Food , 2000 .

[19]  Gordon C. Bruner,et al.  Marketing Scales Handbook: A Compilation of Multi-Item Measures , 1992 .

[20]  P. Couchman,et al.  Public attitudes to genetic engineering in New Zealand , 1990 .

[21]  K. Grunert,et al.  Consumer Attitudes and Decision-Making With Regard to Genetically Engineered Food Products – A Review of the Literature and a Presentation of Models for Future Research , 1998 .

[22]  L. Frewer,et al.  RISK PERCEPTION, SOCIAL TRUST, AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING : IMPLICATIONS FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES , 1999 .